Developing a national database for metastatic colorectal cancer management: perspectives and challenges

Unified framework for patient-derived, tumor-organoid-based predictive testing of standard-of-care therapies in metastatic colorectal cancer

Predictive drug testing of patient-derived tumor organoids (PDTOs) holds promise for personalizing treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), but prospective data are limited to chemotherapy regimens with conflicting results. We describe a unified framework for PDTO-based predictive testing across standard-of-care chemotherapy and biologic and targeted therapy options. In an Australian community cohort, PDTO predictions based on treatment-naive patients (n = 56) and response rates from first-line mCRC clinical trials achieve 83% accuracy for forecasting responses in patients receiving palliative treatments (18 patients, 29 treatments). Similar assay accuracy is achieved in a prospective study of third-line or later mCRC treatment, AGITG FORECAST-1 (n = 30 patients). "Resistant" predictions are associated with inferior progression-free survival; misclassification rates are similar by regimen. Liver metastases are the optimal site for sampling, with testing achievable within 7 weeks for 68.8% cases. Our findings indicate that PDTO drug panel testing can provide predictive information for multifarious standard-of-care therapies for mCRC.

Natural Language Processing of Computed Tomography Reports to Label Metastatic Phenotypes With Prognostic Significance in Patients With Colorectal Cancer

PURPOSE

Natural language processing (NLP) applied to radiology reports can help identify clinically relevant M1 subcategories of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). The primary purpose was to compare the overall survival (OS) of CRC according to American Joint Committee on Cancer TNM staging and explore an alternative classification. The secondary objective was to estimate the frequency of metastasis for each organ.

METHODS

Retrospective study of CRC who underwent computed tomography (CT) chest, abdomen, and pelvis between July 1, 2009, and March 26, 2019, at a tertiary cancer center, previously labeled for the presence or absence of metastasis by an NLP prediction model. Patients were classified in M0, M1a, M1b, and M1c (American Joint Committee on Cancer), or an alternative classification on the basis of the metastasis organ number: M1, single; M2, two; M3, three or more organs. Cox regression models were used to estimate hazard ratios; Kaplan-Meier curves were used to visualize survival curves using the two M1 subclassifications.

RESULTS

Nine thousand nine hundred twenty-eight patients with a total of 48,408 CT chest, abdomen, and pelvis reports were included. On the basis of NLP prediction, the median OS of M1a, M1b, and M1c was 4.47, 1.72, and 1.52 years, respectively. The median OS of M1, M2, and M3 was 4.24, 2.05, and 1.04 years, respectively. Metastases occurred most often in liver (35.8%), abdominopelvic lymph nodes (32.9%), lungs (29.3%), peritoneum (22.0%), thoracic nodes (19.9%), bones (9.2%), and pelvic organs (7.5%). Spleen and adrenal metastases occurred in < 5%.

CONCLUSION

NLP applied to a large radiology report database can identify clinically relevant metastatic phenotypes and be used to investigate new M1 substaging for CRC. Patients with three or more metastatic disease organs have the worst prognosis, with an OS of 1 year.

Leveraging Comprehensive Cancer Registry Data to Enable a Broad Range of Research, Audit and Patient Support Activities

Simple Summary

Registry data has the potential to support a broad range of research, audit and education initiatives. Here, we describe the experience and learnings of a series of large multi-institutional cancer registries that leverage real-world clinical data for a range of purposes, that informs the conduct and output of each registry in a virtuous cycle. Lessons learnt include the need for careful and continuous curation of information being collected, regular database updates, and the need for a continued focus on data quality. As a standalone resource, each registry has supported numerous projects, but linkage with external datasets with patients in common has enhanced the research potential. Multiple projects have linked registry data with matched tissue specimens to support the discovery and valiation of prognostic and predictive markers in the tumour and blood specimens. Registry-based biomarker trials have been successfully supported, generating novel and practice-changing data. Registry-based clinical trials, particularly studies exploring the best use of drug options are now complementing the research conducted in traditional clinical trials. More recent projects supported by the registries include health economic studies, personalised patient education material, and increased consumer engagement, including consumer entered data.

Abstract

Traditional cancer registries have often been siloed efforts, established by single groups with limited objectives. There is the potential for registry data to support a broad range of research, audit and education initiatives. Here, we describe the establishment of a series of comprehensive cancer registries across the spectrum of common solid cancers. The experience and learnings of each registry team as they develop, implement and then use collected data for a range of purposes, that informs the conduct and output of other registries in a virtuous cycle. Each registry is multi-site, multi-disciplinary and aims to collect data of maximal interest and value to a broad range of enquiry, which would be accessible to any researcher with a high-quality proposal. Lessons learnt include the need for careful and continuous curation of data fields, with regular database updates, and the need for a continued focus on data quality. The registry data as a standalone resource has supported numerous projects, but linkage with external datasets with patients in common has enhanced the audit and research potential. Multiple projects have linked registry data with matched tissue specimens to support prognostic and predictive biomarker studies, both validation and discovery. Registry-based biomarker trials have been successfully supported, generating novel and practice-changing data. Registry-based clinical trials, particularly randomised studies exploring the optimal use of available therapy options are now complementing the research conducted in traditional clinical trials. More recent projects supported by the registries include health economic studies, personalised patient education material, and increased consumer engagement, including consumer entered data.

Beyond standard data collection – the promise and potential of BRAIN (Brain tumour Registry Australia INnovation and translation registry)

Background

Real-world data (RWD) is increasingly being embraced as an invaluable source of information to address clinical and policy-relevant questions that are unlikely to ever be answered by clinical trials. However, the largely unrealised potential of RWD is the value to be gained by supporting prospective studies and translational research. Here we describe the design and implementation of an Australian brain cancer registry, BRAIN, which is pursuing these opportunities.

Methods

BRAIN was designed by a panel of clinicians in conjunction with BIOGRID to capture comprehensive clinical data on patients diagnosed with brain tumours from diagnosis through treatment to recurrence or death. Extensive internal and external testing was undertaken, followed by implementation at multiple sites across Victoria and Tasmania.

Results

Between February 2021 and December 2021, a total of 350 new patients from 10 sites, including one private and two regional, were entered into BRAIN. Additionally, BRAIN supports the world’s first registry trial in neuro-oncology, EX-TEM, addressing the optimal duration of post-radiation temozolomide; and BioBRAIN, a dedicated brain tumour translational program providing a pipeline for biospecimen collection matched with linked clinical data.

Conclusions

Here we report on the first data collection effort in brain tumours for Australia, which we believe to be unique worldwide given the number of sites and patients involved and the extent to which the registry resource is being leveraged to support clinical and translational research. Further directions such as passive data flow and data linkages, use of artificial intelligence and inclusion of patient-entered data are being explored.

The Value of Federated Data Networks in Oncology: What Research Questions Do They Answer? Outcomes From a Systematic Literature Review

OBJECTIVES

Real-world evidence (RWE) plays an important role in addressing key research questions of interest to healthcare decision makers. Federated data networks (FDNs) apply novel technology to enable the conduct of RWE studies with multiple partners, without the need to share the individual partner's data set. A systematic review of the published literature was performed to determine which types of research questions can best be addressed through FDNs, specifically in the field of oncology.

METHODS

Systematic searches of MEDLINE and Embase were undertaken to identify the types of research questions that had been addressed in studies using FDNs. Additional information was retrieved about study characteristics, statistical methods, and the FDN itself.

RESULTS

In total, 40 publications were included where research questions on the following had been addressed (multiple categories possible): disease natural history (58%), safety surveillance (18%), treatment pathways (15%), comparative effectiveness (10%), and cost/resource use studies (3%)-13% of studies had to be left uncategorized. A total of 50% of the studies were run with data partners in networks of ≤5. The size of the networks ranged from 227 patients to >5 million patients. Statistical methods used included distributed learning and distributed regression methods.

CONCLUSIONS

Further work is needed to raise awareness of the important role that FDNs can play in leveraging readily available RWE to address key research questions of interest in cancer and the benefits to the research community in engaging in federated data initiatives with a long-term perspective.

Colorectal cancer databases and registries in Australia: what data is available?

BACKGROUND

There are multiple data sources relating to colorectal cancer (CRC) nationwide. Prospective clinical cancer databases, population-based registries and linked administrative data are powerful tools in clinical outcomes research and provide real-world perspective on cancer treatments. This study aims to review the different Australian data sources for CRC from the perspective of conducting comparative research studies using a PICO (patient, intervention, comparison, outcome) framework.

METHODS

Data dictionaries from the different data sources were evaluated for the types of exposure and outcome variables contained to highlight their differing research utility.

RESULTS

State or territory-based cancer registries contain limited histology, cancer staging and treatment detail. They enable investigation of population-level patterns in overall survival (OS) of cancer patients with different demographics. Prospective clinical cancer databases contain more detail, especially surgical. Their strength is in auditing short-term surgical outcomes. They vary in the amount of data collected for other cancer treatments and completion of follow up data. Linked administrative databases have broad population coverage but less surgical detail. They provide population-level data on treatment patterns, short-term outcome measures and OS, as well as long-term surgical outcomes such as identifying patients who did not undergo stoma reversal. These databases cannot assess disease-free survival.

CONCLUSION

Of the various CRC data sources within Australia, linked administrative databases have the potential to provide the widest population coverage combined with the broadest range of exposures and outcomes, and arguably the most research utility.

Initial experience of TAS-102 chemotherapy in Australian patients with Chemo-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer

For patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treatment with Trifluridine/Tipiracil, also known as TAS-102, improves overall survival. This study aims to investigate the efficacy and safety of TAS-102 in a real-world population from Victoria, Australia. A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from the Treatment of Recurrent and Advanced Colorectal Cancer (TRACC) registry was undertaken. The characteristics and outcomes of patients receiving TAS-102 were assessed and compared to those enrolled in the registration study (RECOURSE). Across 13 sites, 107 patients were treated with TAS-102. The median age was 60 years (range: 31-83), compared to 63 for RECOURSE. Comparing registry TAS-102-treated and RECOURSE patients, 75% vs 100% were ECOG performance status 0-1, 74% vs 79% had initiated treatment more than 18 months from diagnosis of metastatic disease and 36% vs 49% were RAS wild-type. Median time on treatment was 10.4 weeks (range: 1.7-32). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.3 months compared to 2 months in RECOURSE, while median overall survival was the same at 7.1 months. Two patients (2.3%) had febrile neutropenia and there were no treatment-related deaths, where TAS-102 dose at treatment initiation was at clinician discretion.TRACC registry patients treated with TAS-102 were younger than those from the RECOURSE trial, with similar overall survival observed. Less strict application of RECIST criteria and less frequent imaging may have contributed to an apparently longer PFS.

Circulating Tumour DNA as a Potential Cost-Effective Biomarker to Reduce Adjuvant Chemotherapy Overtreatment in Stage II Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Substantial adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) overtreatment for stage II colorectal cancer results in a health and financial burden. Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) can improve patient selection for AC by detecting micro-metastatic disease. We estimated the health economic potential of ctDNA-guided AC for stage II colorectal cancer.

METHODS

A cost-utility analysis was performed to compare ctDNA-guided AC to standard of care, where 22.6% of standard of care patients and all ctDNA-positive patients (8.7% of tested patients) received AC and all ctDNA-negative patients (91.3%) did not. A third preference-sensitive ctDNA strategy was included where 6.8% of ctDNA-negative patients would receive AC. A state-transition model was populated using data from a prospective cohort study and clinical registries. Health and economic outcomes were discounted at 5% over a lifetime horizon from a 2019 Australian payer perspective. Extensive scenario and probabilistic analyses quantified model uncertainty.

RESULTS

Compared to standard of care, the ctDNA and preference-sensitive ctDNA strategies increased quality-adjusted life-years by 0.20 (95% confidence interval - 0.40 to 0.81) and 0.19 (- 0.40 to 0.78), and resulted in incremental costs of AUD - 4055 (- 16,853 to 8472) and AUD - 2284 (- 14,685 to 10,116), respectively. Circulating tumour DNA remained cost effective at a willingness to pay of AUD 20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained throughout most scenario analyses in which the proportion of ctDNA-positive patients cured by AC and compliance to a ctDNA-negative test results were decreased.

CONCLUSIONS

Circulating tumour-guided AC is a potentially cost-effective strategy towards reducing overtreatment in stage II colorectal cancer. Results from ongoing randomised clinical studies will be important to reduce uncertainty in the estimates.

Treatment and Outcomes of Oligometastatic Colorectal Cancer Limited to Lymph Node Metastases

INTRODUCTION

The optimal management of isolated distant lymph node metastases (IDLNM) from a colorectal primary, is not clearly established. We aimed to analyze the outcomes of patients with IDLNM treated with systemic therapies plus locoregional therapy with curative intent versus systemic therapies with palliative intent.

MATERIALS & METHODS

Clinical data were collected and reviewed from the Treatment of Recurrent and Advanced Colorectal Cancer registry, a prospective, comprehensive registry for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated at multiple tertiary hospitals across Australia. Clinicopathological characteristics, treatment modalities and survival outcomes were analyzed in patients with IDLNM and compared to patients with disease at other sites.

RESULTS

Of 3408 mCRC patients diagnosed 2009 to 2020, with median follow-up of 38.0 months, 93 (2.7%) were found to have IDLNM. Compared to mCRC at other sites, patients with IDLNM were younger (mean age: 62.1 vs. 65.6 years, P = .02), more likely to have metachronous disease (57.0% vs. 38.9%, P < .01), be KRAS wild-type (74.6% vs. 53.9%, P< .01) and BRAF mutant (12.9% vs. 6.2%, P = .01). Amongst mCRC patients with IDLNM, 24 (25.8%) received treatment with curative intent and had a significantly better overall median survival than those treated with palliative intent (73.5 months vs. 23.2 months, P = .01). These 24 patients had an overall median survival similar (62.7 months, P = .82) to patients with isolated liver or lung metastases also treated with curative intent.

CONCLUSION

Curative treatment strategies (radiotherapy or surgery), with or without systemic therapy, should be considered for mCRC patients with IDLNM where appropriate as assessed by the multidisciplinary team.

Personalizing First-Line Systemic Therapy in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Is There a Role for Initial Low-Intensity Therapy in 2021 and Beyond? A Perspective From Members of the Australasian Gastrointestinal Trials Group

Palliative chemotherapy is the cornerstone of treatment for the majority of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, with the aim of increasing length and quality of life. Although guidelines outline the available treatment options in the first line, they provide limited guidance on choice and intensity of the chemotherapy backbone. Data from the TRIBE and TRIBE2 studies confirm a survival benefit with triplet FOLFOXIRI and bevacizumab, and this is a preferred option for younger patients with good performance status able to tolerate it. However, the relative benefit of a fluoropyrimidine doublet with oxaliplatin or irinotecan over single-agent fluoropyrimidine with or without a biologic is less certain; the available data demonstrate that single-agent fluoropyrimidine plus a biologic with planned sequencing of subsequent agents can produce similar overall survival outcomes with reduced toxicity. Our analysis of local real-world registry data suggests that this is an underutilized approach, particularly in younger and fitter patients. Established prognostic factors, including patient age, performance status, tumor sidedness, and biomarkers such as RAS/BRAF, are key in treatment selection; patients with left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type disease or patients with low tumor bulk may be ideal for a less intensive regimen. Further studies are required to confirm the value of less-intensive regimens in the modern era, where the incorporation of biologic therapies has become routine and where non-chemotherapy options are emerging as viable options for molecularly defined patient subsets.

Patient demographics and management landscape of metastatic colorectal cancer in the third-line setting: Real-world data in an australian population

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer and second leading cause of cancer mortality in Australia, thus carrying a significant disease burden.

AIMS

This analysis aims to explore real-world treatment landscape of metastatic colorectal cancer in the third-line setting.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed treatment of recurrent and advanced colorectal cancer (TRACC) registry database from 2009 onwards. Patients treated with palliative intent who progressed after two lines of therapies were included. One treatment line was defined as any combination of systemic therapy given until progression.

RESULTS

Out of 1820 patients treated palliatively, 32% (590 patients) met study criteria. Of these, 43% (254 patients) proceeded to third-line therapy, equating to 14% of all metastatic patients. In KRAS mutant or unknown tumours (97 patients), fluoropyrimidine (FP)-oxaliplatin combination was the most common choice (51%), followed by FP-irinotecan (15%), trifluridine/tipiracil (11%), mono-chemotherapy (10%), regorafenib (5%) and others (7%). Majority of FP-doublet (83%) was given as rechallenge. In 157 patients with KRAS wildtype disease, monotherapy with EGFR inhibitor was most commonly used (41%), followed by EGFR inhibitor with chemotherapy (20%), FP-doublet (18%), mono-chemotherapy (6%), trifluridine/tipiracil (6%), regorafenib (1%) and others (8%). Median overall survival was 7.1 months (range 0.4-41.2), and median time on third-line treatment was 3 months (range 0.1-40).

CONCLUSIONS

In real-world Australian population, treatment choices differed based on KRAS status and will likely change with the availability of newer drugs on the pharmaceutical benefits scheme. Survival outcomes are comparable to newer agents in clinical trials for select patients.

Cancer clinical trial vs real-world outcomes for standard of care first-line treatment in the advanced disease setting

Clinical trials have strict eligibility criteria, potentially limiting external validity. However, while often discussed this has seldom been explored, particularly across cancer types and at variable time frames posttrial completion. We examined comprehensive registry data (January 2014 to June 2019) for standard first-line treatments for metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC), advanced pancreatic cancer (PC), metastatic HER2-amplified breast cancer (BC) and castrate-resistant prostate cancer (CaP). Registry patient characteristics and outcomes were compared to the practice-changing trial. Registry patients were older than the matched trial cohort by a median of 2-6 years (all P = <.01) for the CRC, BC and PC cohorts. The proportion of Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) 0-1 patients was lower for CRC (94.1% vs 99.2%, P = .001) and BC (94.9% vs 99.3%, P = .001). Progression-free survival (PFS) for registry patients was similar to the trial patients or significantly longer (CaP, Hazard Ratio [HR] = 0.65, P = <.001). Overall survival (OS) was also similar or significantly longer (CaP, HR 0.49, P = <.001). In conclusion, despite real-world patients sometimes being older or having inferior PS to trial cohorts, the survival outcomes achieved were consistently equal or superior to those reported for the same treatment in the trial. We suggest that this is potentially due to optimised use of each treatment over time, improved multidisciplinary care and increased postprogression options. We can reassure clinicians and patients that outcomes matching or exceeding those reported in trials are possible. The potential for survival gains over time should routinely be factored into future trial statistical plans.

Simulating Progression-Free and Overall Survival for First-Line Doublet Chemotherapy With or Without Bevacizumab in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients Based on Real-World Registry Data

BACKGROUND

Simulation models utilizing real-world data have potential to optimize treatment sequencing strategies for specific patient subpopulations, including when conducting clinical trials is not feasible. We aimed to develop a simulation model to estimate progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival for first-line doublet chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab for specific subgroups of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients based on registry data.

METHODS

Data from 867 patients were used to develop two survival models and one logistic regression model that populated a discrete event simulation (DES). Discrimination and calibration were used for internal validation of these models separately and predicted and observed medians and Kaplan-Meier plots were compared for the integrated DES. Bootstrapping was performed to correct for optimism in the internal validation and to generate correlated sets of model parameters for use in a probabilistic analysis to reflect parameter uncertainty.

RESULTS

The survival models showed good calibration based on the regression slopes and modified Hosmer-Lemeshow statistics at 1 and 2 years, but not for short-term predictions at 0.5 years. Modified C-statistics indicated acceptable discrimination. The simulation estimated that median first-line PFS (95% confidence interval) of 219 (25%) patients could be improved from 175 days (156-199) to 269 days (246-294) if treatment would be targeted based on the highest expected PFS.

CONCLUSIONS

Extensive internal validation showed that DES accurately estimated the outcomes of treatment combination strategies for specific subpopulations, with outcomes suggesting treatment could be optimized. Although results based on real-world data are informative, they cannot replace randomized trials.

Metastasectomy and BRAF mutation; an analysis of survival outcome in metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Resection of oligometastases improves survival in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). It is unclear whether the benefit is consistent for BRAF V600E mutant (MT) and wild type (WT) mCRC. This retrospective analysis explores the influence of BRAF MT on survival after metastasectomy.

METHODS

Overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) for BRAF MT and WT mCRC were evaluated. Survival was also analyzed in the cohort of BRAF MT with or without metastasectomy.

RESULTS

Five hundred and thirteen patients who had undergone metastasectomy were identified, 6% were BRAF-MT. Median age 63. Median OS in BRAF MT vs WT: 25.7 vs 48.5 months (hazard ratio [HR] 1.95; 1.18-3.22). However, difference was not significant in a multivariate model. Right primary tumor, intact primary, >1 metastatic site, non-R0 resection, peritoneal metastasis, and synchronous metastasis were independent predictors of worse OS. Among 364 patients with RFS data there was no difference between BRAF MT and WT (16 vs 19 months, p=0.09). In another cohort of 158 BRAF-MT patients, OS was significantly better after metastasectomy compared to "no metastasectomy" (HR 0.34; 0.18-0.65, P= 0.001). Proficient mismatch repair status showed a trend toward worse survival after metastasectomy in BRAF MT (HR 1.71, P = 0.08).

CONCLUSION

OS did not differ after metastasectomy between BRAF MT and WT in a multivariate model. Median OS was >2 years in this study after metastasectomy among BRAFV600E MT patients suggesting a survival benefit of metastasectomy in this group where systemic therapeutic options are limited. Metastasectomy may be considered in carefully selected BRAF-MT patients.

Real-World Treatment and Outcomes of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients With a Poor or Very Poor Performance Status

BACKGROUND

The management of metastatic colorectal cancer patients with a poor performance status (PS) continues to be a clinical dilemma, with the potential activity and safety of treating this population remaining poorly understood. Few of these patients are enrolled onto clinical trials, and poor PS is often multifactorial.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We analyzed the Treatment of Recurrent and Advanced Colorectal Cancer registry to describe treatment practices and outcomes in poor (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group [ECOG] PS 2) and very poor PS (ECOG PS > 2) patients to explore the relationship between age, tumor burden, comorbidities, and PS, and to evaluate the benefit of systemic therapy. Standard descriptive statistical methods, Kaplan-Meier analysis, and a multivariate Cox regression model were used.

RESULTS

Of 2769 registry patients (diagnosed January 2009 to June 2018), 329 (12%) and 182 (7%) patients had a poor and very poor PS, respectively. Good PS patients were more likely to receive systemic therapy than poor and very poor PS patients (85%, 55%, and 21.5%, P < .0001), but clinician assessed response was observed in all subsets (53%, 41%, and 29%, P = .0003). Treatment with chemotherapy was associated with longer median overall survival across PS groups. Exploratory analysis based on comorbidity score and tumor burden subgroups demonstrated a consistently positive overall survival association with treatment. Benefit was observed where poor overall survival was attributable to medical comorbidities and to tumor burden.

CONCLUSION

In routine clinical care, a substantial proportion of poor and very poor PS patients receive active treatment, which is often associated with meaningful clinical benefit.

Health Economic Models for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Methodological Review

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review was to provide a comprehensive and detailed review of structural and methodological assumptions in model-based cost-effectiveness analyses of systemic metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treatments, and discuss their potential impact on health economic outcome estimates.

METHODS

Five databases (EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Health Technology Assessment and National Health Service Health Economic Evaluation Database) were searched on 26 August 2019 for model-based full health economic evaluations of systemic mCRC treatment using a combination of free-text terms and subject headings. Full-text publications in English were eligible for inclusion if they were published in or after the year 2000. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist was used to assess the reporting quality of included publications. Study selection, appraisal and data extraction were performed by two reviewers independently.

RESULTS

The search yielded 1418 publications, of which 54 were included, representing 51 unique studies. Most studies focused on first-line treatment (n = 29, 57%), followed by third-line treatment (n = 13, 25%). Model structures were health-state driven (n = 27, 53%), treatment driven (n = 19, 37%), or a combination (n = 5, 10%). Cohort-level state-transition modelling (STM) was the most common technique (n = 33, 65%), followed by patient-level STM and partitioned survival analysis (both n = 6, 12%). Only 15 studies (29%) reported some sort of model validation. Health economic outcomes for specific strategies differed substantially between studies. For example, survival following first-line treatment with fluorouracil, leucovorin and oxaliplatin ranged from 1.21 to 7.33 years, with treatment costs ranging from US$8125 to US$126,606.

CONCLUSIONS

Model-based cost-effectiveness analyses of systemic mCRC treatments have adopted varied modelling methods and structures, resulting in substantially different outcomes. As models generally focus on first-line treatment without consideration of downstream treatments, there is a profound source of structural uncertainty implying that the cost-effectiveness of treatments across the mCRC pathway remains uncertain.

Immunohistochemical evaluation of the prognostic and predictive power of epidermal growth factor receptor ligand levels in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

For patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors are limited to patients with RAS wild-type tumours. Not all patients will benefit from treatment and better predictive biomarkers are needed. Here we investigated the prognostic and predictive impact of the EGFR ligands amphiregulin (AREG) and epiregulin (EREG). Expression levels were assessed by immunohistochemistry on 99 KRAS wild-type tumours. AREG and EREG positivity was seen in 49% and 50% of cases, respectively. No difference in expression was observed by primary tumour side. There was no significant difference in OS by AREG or EREG expression. In the subset of patients who received an EGFR inhibitor, EREG positivity was associated with longer OS (median 34.0 vs. 27.0 months, p = 0.033), driven by a difference in patients with a left-sided primary (HR 0.37, p = 0.015). Our study supports further investigation into EREG as a predictive biomarker in mCRC.

Demonstrating the feasibility of collecting secondary, de-identified data on Australian patients receiving treatment as part of a Medicine Access Programme

BACKGROUND

In Australia, data generated from the carefully selected, treated and monitored patients enrolled in clinical trials largely inform routine care and funding approvals. Medicine Access Programmes (MAP) enable drug access and while potentially a rich source of data, historically have not collected data beyond a participant list.

AIMS

To explore the feasibility of using MAP to identify patient populations for inclusion in non-interventional studies.

METHODS

Clinicians affiliated with the Walter and Eliza Hall Institute engaged with Roche to implement PeRSIA, a secondary data use non-interventional study of patients receiving neoadjuvant pertuzumab for non-metastatic HER2+ breast cancer. The study utilised a pre-existing Roche-sponsored MAP to identify clinicians as data contributors. Data security, ownership and reporting issues were addressed utilising the BioGrid platform and standards developed for existing Walter and Eliza Hall Institute registries. Disease experts developed project-specific Case Report Forms documenting treatment, surgical and cancer-specific outcomes, and adverse events.

RESULTS

To date, 12 of 16 (75%) clinicians approached to participate in PeRSIA are contributing de-identified data. From February through September 2018, data on 41 patients from seven centres were collected. Median patient age is 56 years (range 36-81), 36 (88%) had Stage 2 to 3 disease and 27 (66%) were node positive. The median number of cycles of neoadjuvant pertuzumab planned was 4.

CONCLUSIONS

This initial report is, to our knowledge, the first description of a secondary data use non-interventional study collecting comprehensive data on patients enrolled, independently, in a MAP. This effort continues and opportunities with other industry partners are being pursued.

The survival outcome of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer based on the site of metastases and the impact of molecular markers and site of primary cancer on metastatic pattern

BACKGROUND

Pattern of spread in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is variable and may reflect different biology in subsets of patients. This is a retrospective study to explore the outcome of patients with mCRC based on their site of metastasis at diagnosis and to explore the association between tumor characteristics [KRAS/RAS, BRAF, mismatch repair (MMR) status, site of primary] and the site of metastasis.

METHODS

Patients from two Australian databases were divided into six groups based on site of metastasis at time of diagnosis of metastatic disease; lung-only, liver-only, lymph node-only or any patients with brain, bone or peritoneal metastases. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) of each cohort compared with the rest of the population. A Mantel-Haenszel chi-squared test used to explore the association between site of metastasis and selected tumor characteristics.

RESULTS

Five thousand nine hundred and sixty-seven patients were included. In a univariate analysis, median OS was significantly higher when metastases were limited to lung or liver and shorter for those with brain, bone or peritoneal metastases (p < .001) in both datasets. BRAF mutation was strongly associated with peritoneal metastases (relative risk = 1.8, p < .001) with lower incidence of lung (RR = 0.3, p = .004) and liver (RR = 0.7, p = .005) limited metastases. Lung-only metastases were more frequent with KRAS/RAS mutation (RR = 1.4, p = .007). Left colon tumors were associated with bone (RR = 1.6, p < .001) and lung-only metastases (RR = 2.3, p = .001) while peritoneal spread was less frequent compared with right colon tumors (RR = 0.6, p < .001). Rectal cancer was associated with brain, bone and lung metastases (RR = 1.7; p = .002, 1.7; p < .001, 2.0; p < .001). Liver-only metastases were less frequent in deficient MMR tumors (RR = 0.7, p = .01).

CONCLUSION

Survival duration with mCRC is related to the site of metastases with lung limited disease showing a more favorable survival outcome compared to other single metastatic site disease. The BRAF mutation and primary rectal cancer were associated with poor prognostic metastatic sites.

Mismatch repair deficiency assessment by immunohistochemistry: for Lynch syndrome screening and beyond

While mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency has been studied extensively, the assessment of MMR status in colorectal and other cancers remains highly relevant, particularly in light of recent data demonstrating that MMR deficiency is a strong predictor for treatment benefit with immune checkpoint inhibitors across multiple tumor types. In colorectal cancer, there is a growing consensus in support of routine MMR testing for Lynch syndrome screening, to inform prognosis and adjuvant chemotherapy use in early stage disease, and to predict response to immunotherapy in advanced disease. Here, we provide a review of the Ventana MMR Immunohistochemistry Panel, which was recently approved by the US FDA for use in Lynch syndrome screening.

Re-inventing the randomized controlled trial in medical oncology: The registry-based trial

Substantial progress has recently been made in optimizing the management of cancer patients, resulting in major gains in survival and quality of life. Much of this progress has resulted from the serial testing of promising treatment strategies, typically using prospective randomized controlled trials to compare outcomes achieved with the new approach versus the current standard(s) of care. However, there is an ever-expanding list of important questions that are difficult to investigate, particularly with respect to determining the optimal sequencing and combination of proven active agents. With the rapidly growing list of clinical, pathologic and molecular characteristics that promise to predict treatment benefit and/or risk for defined patient subsets, many new questions regarding how best to personalize our approach to treatment selection are emerging. These questions can be investigated in the context of registry-based randomized clinical trials. Recently, the potential of registry-based randomized clinical trials was demonstrated in cardiology, highlighting the ability to rapidly recruit large numbers of patients to a trial addressing an important clinical question, with minimal cost and high external validity. In this review, we discuss the challenges and limitations of conventional clinical trials in multidisciplinary cancer care, describe the potential advantages of registry-based randomized trials, and highlight several registry-based oncology studies that are already underway to demonstrate the feasibility of this approach.

Previous Bevacizumab and Efficacy of Later Anti-Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Antibodies in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Results From a Large International Registry

BACKGROUND

The FIRE-3 [5-fluorouracil, folinic acid, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) plus cetuximab versus FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab in first line treatment colorectal cancer (CRC)] study reported that first-line FOLFIRI plus cetuximab versus FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab resulted in similar progression-free survival (PFS) but improved overall survival (OS). A potential explanation is that the initial biologic agent administered in metastatic CRC (mCRC) affects later line efficacy of the other treatments. We sought to test this hypothesis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We interrogated our mCRC registry (Treatment of Recurrent and Advanced Colorectal Cancer) regarding treatment and outcome data for RAS wild-type patients receiving epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors (EGFRIs) in second and subsequent lines. Survival outcomes from the beginning of EGFRI use were determined as a function of previous bevacizumab use and the interval between ceasing bevacizumab and beginning EGFRI use.

RESULTS

Of 2061 patients, 222 eligible patients were identified, of whom 170 (77%) had received previous bevacizumab and 52 (23%) had not. PFS and OS from the start of EGFRIs did not differ by previous bevacizumab use (3.8 vs. 4.2 months; hazard ratio [HR], 1.12; P = .81; 9.0 vs. 9.2 months; HR, 1.19; P = .48, respectively) for the whole cohort or when analyzed by the primary tumor side (HR for left side, 1.07; P = .57; HR for right side, 1.2; P = .52). PFS was significantly shorter with right-sided primary tumors when the interval between bevacizumab and EGFRI use was < 6 versus > 6 months (median, 2.2 vs. 6 months; HR, 2.23; P = .01) but not with left-sided tumors (median, 4.2 vs. 5.5 months; HR, 1.12; P = .26).

CONCLUSION

Previous bevacizumab use had no effect on the activity of subsequent EGFRIs. The apparent effect of time between biologic agents in right-sided tumors might reflect patient selection.

How accurate are medical oncologists' impressions of management of metastatic colorectal cancer in Australia?

AIM

Current efforts to understand patient management in clinical practice are largely based on clinician surveys with uncertain reliability. The TRACC (Treatment of Recurrent and Advanced Colorectal Cancer) database is a multisite registry collecting comprehensive treatment and outcome data on consecutive metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients at multiple sites across Australia. This study aims to determine the accuracy of oncologists' impressions of real-word practice by comparing clinicians' estimates to data captured by TRACC.

METHODS

Nineteen medical oncologists from nine hospitals contributing data to TRACC completed a 34-question survey regarding their impression of the management and outcomes of mCRC at their own practice and other hospitals contributing to the database. Responses were then compared with TRACC data to determine how closely their impressions reflected actual practice.

RESULTS

Data on 1300 patients with mCRC were available. Median clinician estimated frequency of KRAS testing within 6 months of diagnosis was 80% (range: 20-100%); the TRACC documented rate was 43%. Clinicians generally overestimated the rates of first-line treatment, particularly in patients over 75 years. Estimate for bevacizumab in first line was 60% (35-80%) versus 49% in TRACC. Estimated rate for liver resection varied substantially (5-35%), and the estimated median (27%) was inconsistent with the TRACC rate (12%). Oncologists generally felt their practice was similar to other hospitals.

CONCLUSIONS

Oncologists' estimates of current clinical practice varied and were discordant with the TRACC database, often with a tendency to overestimate interventions. Clinician surveys alone do not reliably capture contemporary clinical practices in mCRC.

Chemotherapy plus bevacizumab versus chemotherapy plus cetuximab as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: Results of a registry-based cohort analysis

The present observational cohort study was designed to elucidate the efficacy and safety profile of bevacizumab or cetuximab with chemotherapy as the first-line treatment in Chinese patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Clinical data were collected from a single-center registry study where mCRC patients received first-line fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy combined with either bevacizumab (188 patients with KRAS wild-type or mutated tumors) or cetuximab (101 patients with KRAS wild-type tumors) between January 2009 and December 2013. The Kaplan-Meier method was used for survival analysis. Cox proportional hazards model was used for estimating the prognostic and predictive values of clinicopathological characteristics. No statistically significant difference was observed between the bevacizumab and cetuximab groups in terms of median progression-free survival (PFS) (10.6 vs 8.7 months, P = 0.317), median overall survival (OS) (27.7 vs 28.3 months, P = 0.525), or overall response rate (43.1% vs 53.5%, P = 0.108). For the subset of patients with peritoneal dissemination, bevacizumab-based triplet appears to be superior to cetuximab-based triplet as measured by PFS (9.6 vs 6.1 months) and OS (26.3 vs 12.7 months), but not for patients without peritoneal dissemination (PFS, 10.6 vs 9.1 months; OS, 27.9 vs 30.7 months) (all unadjusted and adjusted interaction P < 0.05). Our study suggests that bevacizumab- or cetuximab-based regimens have similar effectiveness as first-line treatment of mCRC in Chinese population. Patients with peritoneal dissemination were likely to gain more benefit from bevacizumab than cetuximab treatment. Future prospective studies are required to further confirm these results.

The impact of bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer with an intact primary tumor: Results from a large prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Debate continues regarding the benefits versus risks of initial resection of the primary tumor in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients with an asymptomatic primary tumor. Although the benefit of the anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agent bevacizumab alongside first-line chemotherapy in mCRC is established, the impact of bevacizumab on the intact primary tumor (IPT) is less well understood.

METHODS

Data from an Australian mCRC registry were used to assess the impact of bevacizumab-based regimens in the presence of an IPT, to see if this differs from effects in resected primary tumor (RPT) patients and to understand the safety profile of bevacizumab in patients with IPT. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety endpoints were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of 1204 mCRC patients, 826 (69%) were eligible for inclusion. Bevacizumab use was similar in both arms (IPT (64%) versus RPT (70%)); compared with chemotherapy alone, bevacizumab use was associated with significantly longer PFS (IPT: 8.5 months vs 4.7 months, P = 0.017; RPT: 10.8 months vs 5.8 months, P < 0.001) and OS (IPT: 20 months vs 14.8 months, P = 0.005; RPT: 24.4 months vs 17.3 months, P = 0.004)).¹ Bevacizumab use in an IPT was associated with more GI perforations (4.5% vs 1.8%, P = 0.210) but less frequent bleeding (1.5% vs 5.3%, P = 0.050) and thrombosis (1.5% vs 2.7%, P = 0.470), versus chemotherapy alone. Median survival was equivalent between patients that did or did not experience bevacizumab-related adverse events - 20.0 months versus 19.9 months, hazard ratio = 0.98, P = 0.623.¹ CONCLUSIONS: The addition of bevacizumab significantly improved survival outcomes in mCRC with an IPT. The occurrence of bevacizumab-related adverse events did not significantly impact survival outcomes.

Australian contemporary management of synchronous metastatic colorectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

This article outlines the current Australian multidisciplinary treatment of synchronous metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma and assesses the factors that influence patient outcome.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of the prospective 'Treatment of Recurrent and Advanced Colorectal Cancer' registry, describing the patient treatment pathway and documenting the extent of disease, resection of the colorectal primary and metastases, chemotherapy and biological therapy use. Cox regression models for progression-free and overall survival were constructed with a comprehensive set of clinical variables. Analysis was intentionn-ton-treat, quantifying the effect of treatment intent decided at the multidisciplinary team meeting (MDT).

RESULTS

One thousand one hundred and nine patients presented with synchronous metastatic disease between July 2009 and November 2015. Median follow-up was 15.8 months; 4.4% (group 1) had already curative resections of primary and metastases prior to MDT, 22.2% (group 2) were considered curative but were referred to MDT for opinion and/or medical oncology treatment prior to resection and 70.2% were considered palliative at MDT (group 3). Overall, 83% received chemotherapy, 55% had their primary resected and 23% had their metastases resected; 13% of resections were synchronous, 20% were staged with primary resected first and 62% had only the colorectal primary managed surgically. Performance status, metastasis resection (R0 versus R1 versus R2 versus no resection), resection of the colorectal primary and treatment intent determined at MDT were the most significant factors for progression-free and overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the largest Australian series of synchronous metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma and offers insight into the nature and utility of contemporary practice.

Primary Tumor Resection and Overall Survival in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Treated With Palliative Intent

BACKGROUND

The survival impact of primary tumor resection in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with palliative intent remains uncertain. In the absence of randomized data, the objectives of the present study were to examine the effect of primary tumor resection (PTR) and major prognostic variables on overall survival (OS) of patients with de novo mCRC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Consecutive patients from the Australian 'Treatment of Recurrent and Advanced Colorectal Cancer' registry were examined from June 2009 to March 2015. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were used to identify associations between multiple patient or clinical variables and OS. Patients with metachronous mCRC were excluded from the analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 690 patients de novo and 373 metachronous mCRC patients treated with palliative intent were identified. The median follow-up period was 30 months. The median age of de novo patients was 66 years; 57% were male; 77% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 1; and 76% had a colon primary. A total of 216 de novo mCRC patients treated with palliative intent underwent PTR at diagnosis and were more likely to have a colon primary (odds ratio [OR], 15.4), a lower carcinoembryonic antigen level (OR, 2.08), and peritoneal involvement (OR, 2.58; P < .001). On multivariate analysis, PTR at diagnosis in de novo patients was not associated with significantly improved OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.82; 99% confidence interval [CI], 0.62-1.09; P = .068). PTR at diagnosis did not correlate with outcome in de novo patients with a colon primary (HR, 0.74; 99% CI, 0.54-1.01; P = .014) or a rectal primary (HR, 0.81; 99% CI, 0.27-2.44; P = .621).

CONCLUSION

For de novo mCRC patients treated with palliative intent, PTR at diagnosis does not significantly improve OS when adjusting for known major prognostic factors. The outcomes of randomized trials examining the survival impact of PTR are awaited.

Gastrointestinal perforation in metastatic colorectal cancer patients with peritoneal metastases receiving bevacizumab

AIM: To investigate the safety and efficacy of adding bevacizumab to first-line chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer patients with peritoneal disease.

METHODS: We compared rates of gastrointestinal perforation in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer and peritoneal disease receiving first-line chemotherapy with and without bevacizumab in three distinct cohorts: (1) the AGITG MAX trial (Phase III randomised clinical trial comparing capecitabine vs capecitabine and bevacizumab vs capecitabine, bevacizumab and mitomycinC); (2) the prospective Treatment of Recurrent and Advanced Colorectal Cancer (TRACC) registry (any first-line regimen ± bevacizumab); and (3) two cancer centres in New South Wales, Australia [Macarthur Cancer Therapy Centre and Liverpool Cancer Therapy Centre (NSWCC) from January 2005 to Decenber 2012, (any first-line regimen ± bevacizumab). For the AGITG MAX trial capecitabine was compared to the other two arms (capecitabine/bevacizumab and capecitabine/bevacizumab/mitomycinC). In the AGITG MAX trial and the TRACC registry rates of gastrointestinal perforation were also collected in patients who did not have peritoneal metastases. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival, chemotherapy duration, and overall survival. Time-to-event outcomes were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test.

RESULTS: Eighty-four MAX, 179 TRACC and 69 NSWCC patients had peritoneal disease. There were no gastrointestinal perforations recorded in either the MAX subgroup or the NSWCC cohorts. Of the patients without peritoneal disease in the MAX trial, 4/300 (1.3%) in the bevacizumab arms had gastrointestinal perforations compared to 1/123 (0.8%) in the capecitabine alone arm. In the TRACC registry 3/126 (2.4%) patients who had received bevacizumab had a gastrointestinal perforation compared to 1/53 (1.9%) in the chemotherapy alone arm. In a further analysis of patients without peritoneal metastases in the TRACC registry, the rate of gastrointestinal perforations was 9/369 (2.4%) in the chemotherapy/bevacizumab group and 5/177 (2.8%) in the chemotherapy alone group. The addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy was associated with improved progression-free survival in all three cohorts: MAX 6.9 m vs 4.9 m, HR = 0.64 (95%CI: 0.42-1.02); P = 0.063; TRACC 9.1 m vs 5.5 m, HR = 0.61 (95%CI: 0.37-0.86); P = 0.009; NSWCC 8.7 m vs 6.8 m, HR = 0.75 (95%CI: 0.43-1.32); P = 0.32. Chemotherapy duration was similar across the groups.

CONCLUSION: Patients with peritoneal disease do not appear to have an increased risk of gastrointestinal perforations when receiving first-line therapy with bevacizumab compared to systemic therapy alone.